From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,cef1e23795181e0c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com
Subject: Re: Alternate to Unchecked_Conversion - Portable?
Date: 1999/02/25
Message-ID: <7b2l6s$vu3$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 448173139
References: <36d05e39.0@news.pacifier.com>
 <36d2638e.6427631@nntp.concentric.net> <7avpi0$jke$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
 <36d3ba85.713118@nntp.concentric.net>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x6.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Feb 25 04:57:04 1999 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-02-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <36d3ba85.713118@nntp.concentric.net>,
  cjrgreen@concentric.net (Christopher Green) wrote:
> In
> this case, it is natural enough, though not fully
> portable, to declare an Ada array of the actual
> size and map it onto the C array with an address
> clause.

In Ada 83, this is ALWAYS an incorrect approach, because
it is erroneous, which means the compiler need make no
attempt at all (e.g. in suppressing optimziation) to
make this "work".

> In Ada 95, the package Interfaces.C.Pointers is
> a better solution to this kind of problem.

If you look at the implementation of this package, it
will almost certainly use unchecked conversion on pointers!

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own